Robotics and Computer-Integrated Manufacturing 27 (2011) 808–817

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Robotics and Computer-Integrated Manufacturing

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/rcim

Improving the fine-pitch stencil printing capability using the Taguchi

method and Taguchi fuzzy-based model
Tsung-Nan Tsai n
Department of Logistics Management, Shu-Te University, 59, Hun Shan Road, YenChau, Kaohsiung 82445, Taiwan, ROC

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: This paper presents industrial applications for improving the capability of the fine-pitch stencil printing
Received 18 March 2009 process (SPP) based on the DMAIC framework and using Taguchi-based methodologies. SPP is widely
Received in revised form recognized as the main contributor of soldering defects in a surface mount assembly (SMA). An
22 September 2010
inadequate volume of solder paste deposition or poor printing quality can cause soldering defects and
Accepted 13 January 2011
Available online 12 February 2011
lead to significant reworking and repairing costs. In practice, both the desired amount of solder paste
volume (quantitative index) and printing quality (qualitative index) are preferably used to monitor the
Keywords: SPP for the reduction of soldering defects during the statistical control process (SPC), particularly for a
Surface mount technology fine-pitch solder paste printing operation. To continuously improve SPP capability, the DMAIC frame-
Stencil printing
work is followed and Taguchi-based methodologies are proposed under the considerations of single
Taguchi method
characteristic performance index (SCPI) and multiple characteristic performance indices (MCPI). The
Process capability
Fuzzy inference system SCPI is optimized using the conventional Taguchi method. Then, a Taguchi fuzzy-based model is
developed to optimize the SPP with the MCPI property. Optimizing a multi-response problem by the
Taguchi method involves the engineer’s judgment which tends to increase the degree of uncertainty.
The performance of these two approaches is compared through the process capability metric, and the
material and factors significantly affecting the fine-pitch SPP performance are reported.
& 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
1.1. Surface mount assembly
Surface mount technology (SMT) is a significant development in
the electronics industry and is now used to fabricate many types of
electronics products. The surface mount assembly (SMA) process is
comprised of solder paste stencil printing, component placement
(Pick and place, P&P), and solder reflow process steps. A squeegee
is employed in the stencil printing process (SPP) to deposit solder
paste into the stencil openings and to leave the desired amount of
solder paste on the PCB pads where the SMCs will be placed.
The entire assembled board is heated in a reflow oven to form
strong solder joints between the PCB pads and the SMCs. The SMT
production yield becomes increasingly important to fabricate more
reliable modern 3C products because the products’ functional
scopes are more diversified and sophisticated. This issue is parti-
cularly important in producing telecommunication products, due
to the reduced size of the device, extended board complexity, and
increased product functionality.
n
Tel.: +886 7 6158000x4511; fax: +886 7 7801946.
E-mail address: tntsai@stu.edu.tw
To improve the overall SMT production yield, much efforts have
been devoted to enhancing the process capability, particularly for
SPP [1,2]. Studies have reported that approximately 60% of solder-
ing defects originate from poor SPP performance [3,4] because
of nonlinearity. The multiple performance characteristic indices
(MCPI) involved are shown in Fig. 1. Controlling the amount of
solder paste deposits can prevent the failure of solder joints during
the statistical control process (SPC) activity [2]. The closer the
amount of solder paste is to a nominal value, the better the stencil
printing performance. The presence of printing defects (such as
bridges, slumping, incompleteness, or shifting) also has a signifi-
cant influence on the SPP performance and solderability [5]. If the
printing defects occur they will potentially lead to soldering defects
during the downstream processing stage. For example, incomplete
printing defects can cause solder voids in the solder joint, whereas
the bridge and slump prints can cause ‘‘short’’ solder joints after the
solder reflow process. These increase productivity and quality
losses which can lead to the necessity of significant cost expendi-
ture later on to correct the soldering defects through extra
reworking and repairs [6,7].
The smaller the product design, the greater the pin-count of the
components on the PCB, and the poorer the stencil printing
performance will be. Therefore, improvement of fine-pitch stencil
printing capability is necessary so as to increase first-pass yields and
product reliability, supply conforming parts to other downstream

0736-5845/$ - see front matter & 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.rcim.2011.01.002
 T.-N. Tsai / Robotics and Computer-Integrated Manufacturing 27 (2011) 808–817
Qualitative index – Printing quality
Standard Bridge
Pad
Laser
W Quantitative index – solder paste volume
Fig. 1. Multiple quality characteristics of SPP (Compiled from Lathrop [31]).
stages, and thus reduce manufacturing costs. In recent years,
manufacturers and researchers have attempted to ascertain the
desired stencil printing control factors for improving the SPP
performance based on their accumulated field experience, operation
manuals and failure symptoms.
Bao et al. [8] reported the rheology of the solder paste, particle
size in the paste, and its distribution all affect the consistency of the
printing pattern and the performance. Owczarek and Howland [9]
revealed a strong connection between the snap-off distance and the
volume of solder paste deposited. Pan et al. [10] declared the
aperture area and stencil thickness to be the two SPP variables
having the most significant influence on obtaining the appropriate
amount of solder deposition. On the other hand, Whitmore et al. [11]
declared the volume of the solder paste deposited to be unconnected
to the designated stencil thickness. Mannan et al. [12] observed that
the height of the paste deposited is proportional to the printing
speed during the stencil printing process. Apparently controversies
and conflicting results exist between the various studies.
Besides, researchers have usually focused on how to optimize a
single quality or property using various methods and have not
provided a long-term SPP control framework. Studies include those
on artificial intelligence [7], the Taguchi analysis method [13], and
data mining [14]. Furthermore, these research results may involve
mathematical complications that make it difficult for the process
practitioners to have prerequisite knowledge, although proportional
improvement is considered significant.
1.2. Fuzzy inference system
Fuzzy set theory has been widely applied to solve problems
involving vague expert knowledge, uncertainty or imprecise data [15].
Fuzzy inference systems (FIS) derived from fuzzy set theory can be
used to easily transform the linguistic expressions of the experts into
a rule base for the controlling of complex systems, and is suitable for
formulating the relationship between system inputs and responses.
An FIS is comprised of a fuzzifier, a fuzzy rule base, a fuzzy inference
engine and a defuzzifier. The fuzzifier transforms the crisp (nonfuzzy)
inputs into fuzzy sets using membership function (MBF). Currently
there is no universally accepted criterion to properly define the shape
of the MBF for the fuzzy subsets of the control variables. The
Mamdani implication method allows easier interpretation of the
relationship of inputs and responses to the fuzzy rule base, which
809
Slump Incomplete Shift
Solder paste
volume
Area
H Solder paste
height
consists of a set of IF-THEN production rules. The fuzzy inference
engine then performs the inference procedure to generate a fuzzy
value based on IF-THEN rules. Finally the defuzzifier converts the
fuzzy value into a crisp output.
A typical fuzzy rule ‘‘IF (x is Ai and y is Bi) THEN (z is Ci)’’ used
in a Mamdani inference system, can be implemented via a fuzzy
relation Ri with membership function mRi, as defined in Eq. (1):
mRi ¼ mðAi and Bi -Ci Þ ðx,y,zÞ ¼ ½mAi ðxÞ and mBi ðyÞ-mCi ðzÞ, ð1Þ
where Ai and Bi is a fuzzy set Ai  Bi in X  Y; Ri ¼(Ai and Bi)-Ci is a
fuzzy relation in X  Y  Z; and (-) represents the fuzzy implica-
tion function. Considering the simplest fuzzy rule, ‘‘IF (x is Ai)
THEN (y is Bi)’’, the MBF, mRi is shown in Eq. (2):
mR ¼ minfmA ðxÞ, mB ðyÞg,x A X,y A Y: ð2Þ
Given the relation R, of X to Y where the fuzzy set for X is
denoted by A0 , the fuzzy set for Y, denoted by B0 is inferred from A0 .
Based on the Mamdani implication method of inference reason-
ing, the aggregated output for the set of disjunctive rules using
the max-min compositional operation is
mBu ðyÞ ¼ maxfminðmA’ ðxÞ, mR ðx,yÞÞg,x A X,yA Y: ð3Þ
The center-of-area (COA) defuzzification method is frequently
used to compute the weighted average of the MBFs. Assuming a
discrete universe of discourse, the crisp output Z is produced by
calculating the COA of consequence for fuzzy subsets according to
Eq. (4):
Pm
z m ðz Þ
Z ¼ Pi ¼m 0 i C i , ð4Þ
i ¼ 0 mi ðzi Þ
where m is the number of quantization levels of the output; zi is
the amount of output at the quantization levels I; and mi(zi)
represents its membership value in C.
1.3. Taguchi method
The Taguchi method is a cost-effective quality improvement
methodology which has been widely applied in a variety of
industries for the purpose of achieving robustness in manufactur-
ing processes and design [16–19]. The Taguchi method provides a
systematic scheme for determining the effects of various factors
and their possible interactions. The results can help to design a
810 T.-N. Tsai / Robotics and Computer-Integrated Manufacturing 27 (2011) 808–817
process for achieving the particular output and quality character-
istics, as well as uncover important factors that have an influence
on the qualities and characteristics of interest [16]. Two impor-
tant tools provided by the Taguchi design are the orthogonal array
(OA) and the signal-to-noise (S/N) ratio. The OA can be used to
control experimental errors, so as to allow engineers to study
many parameters of influence simultaneously, in order to better
estimate the effects of independent factors and their interactions.
In the Taguchi design both the mean of the performance
characteristic and its variance are considered. The S/N ratio is
employed as a performance measure for evaluating the robust-
ness and variation of a system [20]. A higher S/N ratio represents
better system performance and lower variation. Three types of
S/N ratios were classified by Taguchi [21], based on the quality
characteristics of the response: (1) the smaller-the-better (STB);
(2) the larger-the-better (LTB); and (3) the nominal-the-best (NTB),
as shown in Eqs. (5), (6), and (7), respectively:
 X n
1
S=NSTB ðZÞ ¼ 10 log10 y2 , ð5Þ
n i ¼ 1 ij
 X n
1 1
S=NLTB ðZÞ ¼ 10 log10 , ð6Þ
n i ¼ 1 y2ij
 
m2
S=NNTB ðZÞ ¼ 10 log10
s2
y1 þ y2 þy3 þ    þyn
where m ¼
n 1.5. Six sigma management and DMAIC
Pn 2
2 i ¼ 1 ðyi yÞ
s ¼ : ð7Þ
n1
In the application of a Taguchi design, the main focus is on
improvement of the product and the process [22–24]. However,
most previous applications of the Taguchi method have generally
emphasized optimization of a single response. Consequently
simultaneous optimization solutions on the MCPI property have
been scarce. The optimization of an SPP involving multi-response
characteristics, including the desired amount of solder paste
deposited (quantitative index) and the elimination of printing
defects (qualitative index). Optimizing the multi-response pro-
blem using the Taguchi method involves the engineer’s judgment
which often increases the degree of uncertainty [20]. Traditionally
this sort of problem has been solved by assigning a weight for
each response. However, the weighted S/N ratio does not agree
with the viewpoint of the Taguchi quality loss function. Therefore,
we alternatively converted a multi-response index into a single
synthesis performance index using an FIS to investigate relation-
ships between the multiple responses and the SPP performance
and this way determine the efficiency of each parameter in the
design of the Taguchi experiment.
1.4. Analytic hierarchy process
The analytic hierarchy process (AHP) [25] provides an intuitive
multi-criteria decision-making framework that allows decision-
makers to transform subjective judgments into objective mea-
sures, for the solving of complex and subjective decision-making
problems based on the principles of decomposition, comparative
assessment and synthesis of priorities. Typically a five-step pro-
cedure is used for tackling multi-criteria decision-making or
ranking problems: (1) the problem is discomposed into a hier-
archy of decision elements; (2) inputs are gathered through a
pairwise comparison of decision elements; (3) the consistency of
the judgment matrix is verified using a consistency ratio (CR);
(4) the relative weights of the decision elements are calculated;
and (5) the relative weights and ranking of the decision alter-
native are synthesized.
In AHP, reciprocal relationships are adapted so as to compare
m elements under given conditions, and the response is trans-
formed into a nine-point scale. The results of the pairwise
comparisons are constructed as a judgment matrix. The max-
imum values, lmax, are then calculated. The consistency index (CI)
of the judgment matrix can be calculated using Eq. (8):
lmax m
CI ¼ : ð8Þ
m1
The consistency ratio (CR) allows us to measure the consis-
tency of the pairwise comparisons, as depicted in Eq. (9). A CR of
0.1 or less indicates a consistent judgment [26]
CI
CR ¼ : ð9Þ
RI
The random index (RI) is the consistency index for a randomly
generated reciprocal comparison matrix based on the nine-
point scale.
Applications of AHP have been dominant in manufacturing and
other fields [27]. The printing quality is judged subjectively by
human-inspectors with/without the aid of an automated visual
inspection (AVI) system. The AHP method is suitably employed in
order to derive the relative weight of each printing defect
subjectively judged by engineers according to the severity of
PCB functionality.
Six-sigma quality management strategy follows the methodol-
ogy inspired by Deming’s Plan-Do-Check-Act (PDCA) Cycle, which
has been widely implemented in many industries. Six-Sigma uses
a set of quality management tools to identify and remove the
causes of defects and errors in both manufacturing and business
processes. The acronym Define-Measure-Analyze-Improve-Con-
trol (DMAIC) is used for projects aimed at improving an existing
process. The basic DMAIC deployment roadmap consists of the
following five steps [28]:
(1) Define: define the related improvement goals pertaining to
customer demands and the enterprise strategy.
(2) Measure: measure the current process capability and collect
relevant data.
(3) Analyze: analyze the process data to ascertain the cause-and-
effect relationships of interest, and ensure that all system
factors have been considered.
(4) Improve: optimize the process based on data analysis using
DOE, process capability analysis, and other statistical
techniques.
(5) Control: conduct pilot runs to achieve desired process cap-
ability and make advances to the mass production, establish
long-term process control mechanisms, and execute contin-
uous monitoring of the process.
The remainder of this paper is organized as follows. In Section
2 the proposed methodology is outlined, followed by a step-by-
step discussion. Section 3 discusses the findings and results. The
concluding remarks are presented in Section 4.
2. The proposed methodology
In this study, we work with the DMAIC framework to improve
the SPP capability, as shown in Fig. 2. This main effort is to reduce
variation in the volume of solder paste deposits from a nominal
value and eliminate printing defects under the considerations of
 T.-N. Tsai / Robotics and Computer-Integrated Manufacturing 27 (2011) 808–817 811

Collect statistical Perform Gage R&R

process control data study
M

Analyze control chart

and process capability

Determine critical to
quality (CTQ) of SPP
Database Rule base A
Fuzzy knowledge base
Determine key SPP
factors for •Solder paste volume
investigation •Printing quality Fuzzy inference
Fuzzification Defuzzification
Method #2 engine
Fuzzy inference system
Design and conduct a
L18(2 1×37) experiment Multiple characteristics
Performance indices (MCPI)
•Solder paste Method #1
volume
Taguchi method – Taguchi fuzzy-based model- I
SCPI optimization MCPI optimization

Confirmation test, and

performance comparisons

Long-term process control C

Fig. 2. Roadmap for SPP optimization and capability improvement.

single and multiple performance indices. The sub-goals include Table 1

the following: (1) comparing the optimization performance Summary of the data for the Gage R&R study.
attained by the Taguchi method and Taguchi fuzzy-based model;
Source StdDev Study var Study var
(2) identifying the factors having significant effects on the (SD) (6 SD) (SV) (%)
fine-pitch SPP performance; and (3) enhancing the SPP capability
for fine-pitch SMCs with minimal defects. The ‘‘define’’ phase of Total gage R&R 21.845 131.073 15.32
DMAIC is outlined in this section and Section 1.1. The other Repeatability 21.845 131.073 15.32
Reproducibility 0.000 0.000 0.000
phases are described in the following subsections. Part-to-part 140.924 845.545 98.82
Total variation 142.607 855.644 100.00
2.1. Instrument accuracy
Note: number of distinct categories (NDC) ¼ 9.
Data analysis and the calculation of processing capability can
be error-prone without a precise measurement system [23]. In Xbar-R Chart
the ‘‘measure’’ phase, the SPC data was collected for further 6200 UCL=6168.0
Sample Mean

process capability analysis. A gage repeatability and reproduci- 6000

bility (Gage R&R) study for an automated optics inspection (AOI) _
5800 X=5762.2
is performed to minimize the variability in the measurement 5600
system and operators before the experiment was launched. In the 5400 LCL=5356.4
experiments, the volume of solder paste was measured with an 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
AOI system, and printing defects were identified based on the Sample UCL=1021
subjective judgment of human-inspectors using the automated
1000
Sample Range

visual inspection (AVI) system. Ten bricks of solder paste deposits

were measured with three replications and four operators. The 750
500 _ R=397
results of the Gage R&R study are shown in Table 1. The operators
250
exhibit a consistent measuring stability and reproducibility. The LCL=0
0
total Gage R&R accounts for 15.32% of the study variation ( o30%)
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
showing that the AOI system is acceptable for the purpose of
Sample
distinguishing 9 types of parts and to adequately categorize
said parts. Fig. 3. XR control charts for stencil printing process status.
Fifteen PCBs with five thin mall outlined package (TSOP)
(lead-pitch: 0.5 mm) components on each board were sampled. The 1021.0 mil3. Viewing the control charts, it can be seen that the
volume of solder paste deposits was measured for each component process has an ‘‘in-control’’ status.
(three samples each) (15  3¼ 45). Thereafter, the mean (x) and R The SPP capability analysis is shown in Fig. 4. The upper
control charts were constructed and are shown in Fig. 3. In this figure, specification limit (USL), Target and lower specification limit (LSL)
the lower control limit (LCL), center line (CL), and upper control limit for 0.5 mm pitch printing process employed by the subject
(UCL) are computed to be 5356.6, 5762.2 and 6168.0 mil3, respec- company are 65003, 5850 and 5250 mil3 for day-to-day process
tively. The LCL, CL, UCL control limits of the R-chart are 0.0, 397.0, and control. The Cp computed for the initial stage (with a process
812 T.-N. Tsai / Robotics and Computer-Integrated Manufacturing 27 (2011) 808–817

mean (x) of 5762.2 mil3) is 0.89 and Cpk is calculated to be 0.73. substantially critical. Various factors of influence must be considered
Notably both the Cp and Cpk values show that stencil printing in the design of a robust fine-pitch solder paste deposition process.
capability is not sufficient to meet industrial requirements. We considered a continuum of factors from previous stu-
dies [9,10,12] that impact the measured characteristics, as well as
2.2. Analysis and improvement the expert knowledge of the experienced process practitioners who
work for company V. Important input factors taken into considera-
tion are shown in Fig. 5 in red.
Proper selection of the factors and factor levels used in the
In the ‘‘improve’’ phase, the experimental design is used to
experiment is an important issue during the ‘‘analyze’’ phase if one
reduce SPP variation and move the design towards the desired
is to achieve the appropriate design space. The performance of
printing performance. Full factorial experimental design requires
stencil printing is influenced by the geometric properties of the
a number of experimental runs which makes the process time-
stencil design, stencil printer, characteristics of the solder paste, the
consuming and cost-ineffective. To effectively ascertain the key
product configuration, and the printing parameter settings [1]. As
stencil printing factors, a fractional factorial experimental design
indicated in the literature review in Section 1.1, there is no rule-of-
uses a portion of the full factorial columns to estimate the main
thumb to help selecting key SPP factors. There is a dearth of relevant
factor effects and their interactions.
knowledge and a number of controversies and conflictions
The settings for each printing factor are shown in Table 2.
among previous studies. Accordingly the selection of process factors
Factor (A) has two levels (component lead-pitch), whereas seven
for robust process design and optimization of fine-pitch SPP is
other factors (B, C, D, E, F, G, and H) each possess three levels. The
initial factor level combination is B2C2D2E2F2G2H2. The Taguchi
Stencil Printing Process Capability Analysis
method relies on the assignment of factors into a specific OA to
LSL Target USL determine which test combinations use minimal resources,
Within
Process Data Overall thereby reducing the experimental design complexity. For exam-
LSL 5250
T arget 5850
ple, an examination of eight factors (21  37) requires a total of
Potential (Within) Capability
USL 6500 Cp 0.89 4374 trials. Taguchi OA L18 is selected due to fitting the experi-
CPL 0.73
Sample Mean 5762.18
CPU 1.05
mental requirements and only needing 18 experimental runs. A
Sample N 45 Cpk 0.73 three-level L18 (21  37) orthogonal array with eight factors is
StDev(Within) 234.285
StDev(Overall) 326.599 Overall Capability employed in order to maintain the current process settings in the
Pp 0.64 middle level and improve SPP capability. The optimal stencil
PPL 0.52
PPU 0.75
Ppk 0.52
printing parameters are determined by examining the experi-
Cpm 0.59 mental data acquired by using the OA. The stencil printing factors
and the levels considered in the experiment are shown in Table 2.
00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 Three customized laser-cut stainless stencils were selected
50 52 54 56 58 60 62 64
with different stencil thicknesses (1.0, 1.2, and 1.5 mm) and
Fig. 4. Capability analysis for SPP. aperture sizes (based on pad area ratio, 85%, 100%, and 115%),

Aperture
Type design
Stencil
design
Thickness
Manufacturing
Type process
Printing
Squeegee
parameters

Down-stop Wiping Working

speed frequency environment
Machine
setup
Snap-off Squeegee Squeegee Alignment
Stencil printing

distance speed pressure accuracy

Density
factors

Product
Component
configuration
Types Lead-pitch

Particle
shape Thixotropy Supplier
Solder
powder
Solder Particle Solids Storage
paste distribution content
Type Viscosity
Flux
Flux Solvent evaporation
content rate

Fig. 5. Stencil printing factors (for interpretation of the references to color in this figure, the reader is referred to the web version of this article).
 T.-N. Tsai / Robotics and Computer-Integrated Manufacturing 27 (2011) 808–817 813

Table 2
Stencil printing parameters and levels used in the experiment.

Stencil printing parameters Level I Level II Level III Descriptions

A: lead-pitch (mm/mils)
B: paste particle size (type)
C: squeegee pressure (bar)
D: squeegee speed (mm/s)
E: snap-off height (mm)
F: stencil aperture area (%)
G: stencil thickness (mm)
H: paste viscosity (kcps)
0.4/16 0.5/20 Distance between the centers of the two component
leads in the IC package
 200+ 325 mesh (II)  325 + 400 mesh (III)  400 + 500 mesh (IV) Diameter of the solder paste particle
1 3 5 Amount of air pressure applied on the squeegee
20 40 60 Squeegee traveling speed
0 1 2 Distance between the PCB and the stencil
85 100 115 Ratio of stencil aperture and area of pad pattern
1 1.2 1.5 Thickness of the laser-cut stencil
800 1050 1300 Solder paste viscosity

Note: each initial factor level is identified by an underscore.

Table 3
1005 R R1
Summarized weighting data for evaluating printing quality.
Fiducial
15.4 Alternative Bridge Slump Incomplete Shift
1005 C U1 mm

(CR¼ 0.02)
SQFP-128P P=0.4
15.4 Priority 0.261 0.169 0.451 0.119
mm

Fiducial
mark
Tolling Hole
U2
U3
SOIC-32 P=0.65 SOIC-32 P=0.65 TSOP-32 P=0.5 TSOP-32 P=0.5
Fig. 6. Customized stencil.
as shown in Fig. 6. We particularly consider the impact of the
solder paste transfer rates as derived from the various combina-
tions of stencil thickness and aperture area. Some of the noises in
this experiment arise from (1) working temperature and humility
(2) variations in the stencil printer; and (3) dust.
The focused printing defects are shown in the top part of Fig. 1,
which include bridge, slumping, incompleteness and shifting, and are
subjectively identified by human-inspectors using AVI equipment.
The relative weight for each type of printing defect was ranked by
experienced engineers based on the severity of its impact on PCB
functionality using the AHP method, as shown in Table 3. Note that a
CR value of less than 0.1 indicts a consistent judgment is obtained. For
example, there are bridge and shifting defects in the experimental
run, the printing quality score is (1-0.261-0.119)  100¼62 calcu-
lated using a hundred-point scale (multiplied by 100).
The experiments were conducted in a random order to eliminate
bias. The responses used for further analysis included the volume of
the solder paste deposits and printing quality score. Three repeti-
tions were performed for each experimental run. The amount of
solder paste deposit was measured at the four corners of the shrink
quad flat pack (SQFP) and TSOP packages. Hence, eight solder
paste bricks were measured for SQFP and four bricks for TSOP. The
S/N ratios were computed for both quantitative (solder paste
volume—Z1) and qualitative (printing defect—Z2) indices for each
of the 18 runs, are given in Table 4. The solder paste volume is an
NTB type quality characteristic (calculated using Eq. (9)) because
different lead-pitch printing processes require different amounts of
solder paste during deposition, whereas the printing defect is an LTB
type quality characteristic (calculated using Eq. (8)). Greater S/N
ratios correspond to a better printing performance.
2.2.1. Statistical analysis
For statistical analysis of the DOE, the analysis of variance
(ANOVA) was performed to determine the significance of each
factor in terms of its effects on the quality characteristic(s). The
ANOVA analysis branches the total effect of the averaged output
quality characteristic and variability to each factor in the OA. The
significance test is based on the F distribution, which is a ratio of
the degrees of freedom (DoF) for the factor divided by the DoF of
the experimental error. Taguchi suggested adopting percentage
contribution (r%) to evaluate the factor’s degree of importance on
the quality characteristic, which can be expressed as
rð%Þ ¼ SSFu =SST  100%, ð10Þ
where SS’F ¼ SSF Verror  DoF is the modified sum of squares for
each factor; and SST is the total sum of the squares for each factor.
In the preliminary ANOVA analysis, the factors paste particle
size (B), squeegee speed (D), and snap-off height (E) are insignif-
icant since their F ratios have a confidence significance of less
than 95%. Consequently these three factors are pooled and
considered error terms. The summary of the ANOVA analysis of
the S/N ratios and the results is shown in Table 5. The component
lead-pitch (A), stencil aperture area (F), and stencil thickness
(G) account for approximately 83.66% of the total variation in the
SPP. Specifically the lead-pitch factor represents about 55% of the
variation. This indicates that the product configuration and stencil
design have a significant effect on the amount of the solder paste
deposits and the overall printing performance considering the
single characteristic performance.
2.2.2. Optimizing SCPI of stencil printing using the Taguchi method
The conventional Taguchi method is employed in order to
optimize the SPP with a single response using the experimental
results shown in Table 4. The main effects of the S/N ratios and
mean are shown in Fig. 7(a). The variation is reduced by selecting
the factor levels in order to maximize the S/N ratios. During
ANOVA analysis of the S/N ratios, the main contributors are
factors A, F, and G. The ‘‘A’’ factor (lead-pitch) is categorized into
0.4 mm (ultra-fine-pitch) and 0.5 mm (fine-pitch) printing pro-
cesses which identify the different lead-pitch printing require-
ments. Consequently for the 0.4 mm lead-pitch process, the
optimal combination of factor levels will be A1C3F3G3H3. For the
0.5 mm lead-pitch process, the optimal combination of factor
levels will be A2C3F3G3H3.
To improve SPP capability, two important parts need to be
focused upon: (1) reducing the variation of solder paste deposits;
814 T.-N. Tsai / Robotics and Computer-Integrated Manufacturing 27 (2011) 808–817

Table 4
Experimental results and performance evaluations.

Exp. Control factors Solder paste volume (quantitative) Solder paste printing quality (qualitative)
run
A B C D E F G H yi1 yi2 yi3 yi si Z1 (dB) vj1 vj2 vj3 vj sj Z2 (dB)

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 3255 3354 3248 2582.7 46.76 34.84 100 100 88 96.00 6.93 39.60
2 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2325 2298 2409 3072.7 50.16 35.74 83 74 88 81.67 7.09 38.17
3 1 1 3 3 3 3 3 3 2945 3043 3023 3654.0 32.05 41.14 100 83 100 94.33 9.81 39.39
4 1 2 1 1 2 2 3 3 2635 2595 2646 3447.3 37.07 39.37 100 74 55 76.33 22.59 36.90
5 1 2 2 2 3 3 1 1 4185 4201 4156 3135.7 48.88 36.14 88 83 100 90.33 8.74 39.04
6 1 2 3 3 1 1 2 2 2480 2467 2511 2895.0 37.80 37.68 55 38 62 51.67 12.34 33.69
7 1 3 1 2 1 3 2 3 3875 3910 3777 3664.7 36.61 40.01 88 88 100 92.00 6.93 39.23
8 1 3 2 3 2 1 3 1 2015 2098 2139 3379.3 43.32 37.84 55 55 43 51.00 6.93 33.97
9 1 3 3 1 3 2 1 2 2790 2856 2734 3247.0 48.14 36.58 100 83 100 94.33 9.81 39.39
10 2 1 1 3 2 2 2 1 6045 5945 5978 5869.0 57.97 40.11 100 100 88 96.00 6.93 39.60
11 2 1 2 1 1 3 3 2 5735 5784 5701 6480.7 46.20 42.94 83 74 88 81.67 7.09 38.17
12 2 1 3 2 2 1 1 3 4185 4089 4209 4907.0 50.57 39.74 43 43 55 47.00 6.93 33.27
13 2 2 1 2 3 1 3 2 4960 5089 4912 5438.7 45.61 41.53 100 100 88 96.00 6.93 39.60
14 2 2 2 3 1 2 1 3 6510 6477 6539 5262.3 44.84 41.39 100 83 88 90.33 8.74 39.04
15 2 2 3 1 2 3 2 1 6355 6262 6401 6263.3 47.06 42.48 100 88 83 90.33 8.74 39.04
16 2 3 1 3 2 3 1 2 7250 7209 7289 5963.3 50.95 41.37 83 100 74 85.67 13.20 38.46
17 2 3 2 1 3 1 2 3 5425 5380 5445 5542.3 55.05 40.06 100 74 55 76.33 22.59 36.90
18 2 3 3 2 1 2 3 1 5270 5243 5290 6030.0 42.72 42.99 100 88 83 90.33 8.74 39.04

Table 5 board are utilized for the confirmation experiments. Experimental

ANAVA analysis results for S/N ratios. process conditions include using C3F3G3H3 for both the 0.4 (A1)
and 0.5 mm (A2) pitch printing processes for consideration of the
Source DoF SSF Adj MS F ratio SS’F r (%)
SCPI (solder paste volume). The volume of solder paste bricks
A 1 61.432 61.432 75.36 60.62 55.41 was measured for each component. The analysis results for the
C 2 3.523 1.761 2.16 1.89 1.73 original and the optimum settings shown in Table 6 show that the
F 2 13.106 6.553 8.04 11.48 10.49 S/N ratios improved for both the 0.4 and 0.5 mm cases at 5.11 dB.
G 2 21.053 10.527 12.91 19.42 17.75
H 2 4.977 2.488 3.05 3.35 3.06
The mean solder paste volume is increased by 21.2% and 11.7% for
Residual error 2 0.411 0.206 the 0.4 and 0.5 mm lead-pitch printing processes, respectively.
Pooled error 6 4.891 0.815 11.55 The closer the solder paste volume is to the nominal value, the
Total 17 109.393 100.00 better the SPP performance. The mean of the solder paste volume
must be adjusted to agree with the nominal value. According
Note: factors B, D, and E are pooled into error term.
to Fig. 7(b), the solder paste volume increased monotonically with
respect to factors F (stencil aperture size) and G (stencil thick-
ness). Thus, another confirmation experiment was conducted
A B C D E F G H using the setting C3F2G2H3 and S/N ratio (42.31 dB) to obtain
42
S/N ratio (dB)

the mean (5819 mil3). The mean approached the CL value

41
(5850 mil3) that is used by the subject company (company V).
40
Nevertheless, for the 0.4 mm pitch printing process, the optimum
39 settings needing to acquire the appropriate amount of solder
38 paste deposits should be kept at A1C3F3G3H3 which is closer to the
37 nominal value (CL)—4850 mil3 used by the subject company. For
A1
A2
B1
B2
B3
C1
C2
C3
D1
D2
D3
E1
E2
E3
F1
F2
F3
G1
G2
G3
H1
H2
H3

the mixed lead-pitch printing process (i.e., PCB is designated

Factor levels with 0.4 and 0.5 mm pitch components), larger stencil apertures
(115% pad area) and a 1.2 mm thick stencil are needed for the
0.4 mm lead-pitch components, to deposit the proper amount of
Solder paste volume (mil3)

solder paste, whereas stencil apertures with a 115% pad area

A B C D E F G H
6000 and a 1.0 mm thick stencil are suggested for 0.5 mm lead-
5500 pitch components in order to deposit the appropriate amount of
5000 solder paste.
4500
4000
3500 2.2.3. Optimizing MCPI using the Taguchi fuzzy-based model
3000 A Taguchi fuzzy-based model is developed to optimize the stencil
A1
A2
B1
B2
B3
C1
C2
C3
D1
D2
D3
E1
E2
E3
F1
F2
F3
G1
G2
G3
H1
H2
H3

printing process with the MCPI properties. The experimental results

Factor levels
Fig. 7. Main effects plotted for S/N ratio and mean.
and (2) to adjust the process mean so that it is close to the
nominal (target) value. Fifteen PCBs with two TSOP (lead-pitch:
0.5 mm) and one SQFP components (lead-pitch: 0.4 mm) on each
(shown in Table 4) are used for the analysis. The S/N ratios for the
solder paste volume are found to be between 34.84 and 42.94 dB.
The S/N ratios for solder paste volume are lower for experimental
runs 1 and 2 have lower and higher printing quality, respectively.
This indicates that the volume of solder paste deposits is insufficient,
but a good shaped brick is formed. However, the stencil printing
performance is still doubtful in its ability to obtain good solder joints
after the solder reflow process.
 T.-N. Tsai / Robotics and Computer-Integrated Manufacturing 27 (2011) 808–817 815

Table 6
Predicted results for original and optimum settings.

Lead-pitch A1 (0.4 mm pitch) A2 (0.5 mm pitch)

Settings B2C2D2E2F2G2H2 C3F3G3H3 B2C2D2E2F2G2H2 C3F3G3H3 C3F2G2H3

(original) (1st (original) (1st (2nd
optimized) optimized) optimized)

S/N ratio (dB) 36.42 41.53 40.11 45.22 42.31

Mean (mil3) 4116 4778 5536 6198 5819

Table 8
Multiple characteristic performance indices (MCPI).

Run (no.) I-S/N V-S/N MCPI

1 0.198 0.000 0.078

2 0.470 0.110 0.282
3 0.845 0.772 0.895
4 0.003 0.555 0.333
5 0.912 0.159 0.500
6 0.066 0.348 0.209
7 0.942 0.634 0.780
8 0.111 0.368 0.221
9 0.967 0.213 0.213
10 1.000 0.646 0.788
11 0.775 0.993 0.898
12 0.000 0.601 0.361
13 1.000 0.820 0.938
14 0.912 0.803 0.923
15 0.912 0.937 0.950
16 0.820 0.800 0.904
17 0.573 0.640 0.624
18 0.912 1.000 0.950

Fig. 8. Membership functions of inputs and MCPI.

Table 9
Table 7 ANOVA analysis results for MCPI S/N ratios.
Fuzzy rules for multiple performance indices.
Source DoF SSF Adj MS F ratio SS’F r (%)
Stencil printing process: MCPI Normalized printing quality
(qualitative) A 1 296.205 296.205 55.38 290.857 41.53
D 2 46.895 23.448 4.38 36.198 5.17
VL L M H VH E 2 25.474 12.737 2.38 14.777 2.11
F 2 216.51 108.255 20.24 205.813 29.38
Normalized solder paste volume VL T VS S SM M G 2 61.676 30.838 5.77 50.979 7.28
(quantitative) L VS S SM M ML H 2 29.709 14.855 2.78 19.012 2.71
M S SM M ML L Residual error 2 2.539 1.270
H SM M ML L VL Pooled error 4 21.394 5.349 11.82
VH M ML L VL H Total 17 700.403 100.00

Note: factors B and C are pooled into error terms.

A triangular MBF is the easiest way to approach the convex

A1
A2

D1
D2
D3

G1
G2
G3
H1
H2
H3
function and the simplest way to explain system behavior [29]. In
B1
B2
B3
C1
C2
C3

E1
E2
E3
F1
F2
F3

the MCPI optimization strategy, the S/N ratios are first fuzzified
-1
using triangular MBFs. Five fuzzy subsets are assigned for the two
inputs (The S/N ratios for both solder paste volume and printing -3
quality are normalized as two input variables), including very_- -5
low (VL), low (L), medium (M), high (H), and very_high (VH), as -7
graphically depicted at the top of Fig. 8. Nine fuzzy subsets are -9
assigned for output (MCPI), including Tiny (T), Very_small (VS), -11
Small (S), Small_medium (SM), Medium (M), Medium_large (ML),
Large (L), Very_large (VL), and Huge (H), as shown on the bottom Fig. 9. Main effect plots for S/N ratios of MCPI.
of Fig. 8.
Twenty-five possible fuzzy rules (see Table 7) are derived synthesis index (MCPI) using the COA defuzzification method, as
directly according to the criterion that the larger the S/N ratio, the shown in Table 8.
better the performance characteristic will be. Next, the inference The greater the MCPI value, the more optimal the combination of
engine performs a fuzzy reasoning on the fuzzy rules to generate SPP parameters obtained is (under the considerations of solder paste
a fuzzy value. The fuzzy reasoning of these rules then yields a volume and printing quality). The S/N ratios for MCPI computed for
fuzzy output using the max-min compositional operation [30]. each level of the factors are shown in Table 9. The component lead-
Finally the defuzzifer converts the fuzzy value into a crisp pitch (A) and stencil aperture area (F) account for 70% of the total
816 T.-N. Tsai / Robotics and Computer-Integrated Manufacturing 27 (2011) 808–817

variation in the SPP. The main effects for MCPI S/N ratios are shown
in Fig. 9. The optimum parameter setting of 0.4 mm lead-pitch
stencil printing process is A1D3E3F3G3H3, while the 0.5 mm pitch
stencil printing process is set at A2D3E3F3G3H3. The factor levels for
D, E, F, G, and H are identical and are considered simultaneously for
the both 0.4 and 0.5 mm lead-pitch printing processes.
Unfortunately the condition A2D3E3F3G3H3 for MCPI can produce
excessive amounts of solder paste. This result is analogous to
those found in a previous study considering the SCPI property, as
discussed in Section 2.2.2. Fifteen PCBs (each having three SMCs)
were utilized in the confirmation experiment under the condition-
A2D2E3F2G3H3 to achieve appropriate solder paste volumes closer to
the nominal value (5850 mil3). The results of the confirmation
experiment for MCPI optimization are shown in Table 10. The S/N
ratios for both the 0.4 and 0.5 mm cases improved at 9.51 dB.
The optimum parameter settings gain improvement (6.22 dB) is
comparable to the original setting for the 0.5 mm lead-pitch printing
process. In addition, both the 0.4 and 0.5 mm lead-pitch printing
processes can deposit more appropriate amounts of solder paste.
3. Results and discussions
Following the DMAIC framework, the real SPC data collected
from the subject company were analyzed and the SPP capability
improved. In the SCPI optimization stage, we found that the main
factors affect SPP performance are the component lead-pitch,
stencil aperture ratio and stencil thickness. The conclusion of the
factor analysis is identical to the previous study [10]. The
optimum parameter settings derived from this approach show
that the S/N ratios improved for both the 0.4 and 0.5 mm lead-
pitch stencil printing cases at 5.11 dB. Two additional suggestions
used to acquire the optimum volume of solder paste for different
lead-pitch printing processes are as follows:
 The 0.4 mm lead-pitch printing process: A larger stencil aperture
(120% pad area), higher squeegee pressure (5 bar), larger snap-
off distance (2 mm), thicker stencil (1.2 mm), and higher paste
viscosity (1300 kcps) are recommended to make it closer to
the nominal value.
 The mixed lead-pitch printing process: A larger stencil aperture
(115% pad area) and a 1.2 mm thick stencil are needed for the
0.4 mm lead-pitch printing process to deposit the proper
amount of solder paste, whereas stencil apertures with a
115% pad area and a 1.0 mm thick stencil are suggested for
0.5 mm lead-pitch printing instances.
In the MCPI optimization stage, the main factors lead-pitch,
squeegee speed, snap-off distance, stencil aperture area, stencil
thickness and paste viscosity are reported. The parameter settings
to deposit appropriate amount of solder paste for both the 0.4 and
0.5 mm lead-pitch printing processes are as follows: a medium
squeegee speed (40 mm/s), larger snap-off height (2 mm), larger
stencil aperture (120% pad area) (1.0 mm), and higher paste
viscosity (1300 kcps). All are recommended to approach closer
to the nominal value. However, after the confirmation experi-
ments, the condition (A2D2E3F2G3H3) can lead to improvement
(6.22 dB) when compared to the original settings. The S/N ratios

Table 10
Summary of optimization performance for MCPI.

Lead-pitch A1 (0.4 mm pitch) A2 (0.5 mm pitch)

Settings B2C2D2E2F2G2H2 D3E3F3G3H3 B2C2D2E2F2G2H2 D3E3F3G3H3 D2E3F2G3H3

(original) (1st optimized) (original) (1st optimized) (2nd optimized)

S/N ratio (dB)  8.82 0.69  0.71 8.80 5.51

Mean (MCPI) 0.29 0.85 0.71 1.28 0.97
Mean (volume) (mil3) 4135 4822 5505 6218 5835

6100 x control chart

6000 UCL = 6065 CL = 5818 LCL = 5572 UCL = 6078 CL = 5835 LCL = 5592
Cp = 1.463 Cpk = 1.33 Cp = 1.485 Cpk = 1.38
5900
5800
5700
5600
5500
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

700 R control chart

600
UCL = 621 CL = 241 LCL = 0 UCL = 611 CL = 237 LCL = 0
500 σ = 142.39 σ = 140.26
400
300
200
100
0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
Single characteristic index optimization Multi-characteristic index optimization

Fig. 10. XR control charts and capability analysis.

 T.-N. Tsai / Robotics and Computer-Integrated Manufacturing 27 (2011) 808–817
for both the 0.4 and 0.5 mm lead-pitch printing processes
improved at 9.51 dB. Apparently the fact that the MCPI optimiza-
tion performance is superior to that of the SCPI is confirmed. Both
the S/N ratio and sample mean of the MCPI optimization stage are
closer to the nominal value.
We further generated xR control charts and calculated the
process capability indices—Cp and Cpk, as shown in Fig. 10. Compared
with the status for the mass production phase (see Fig. 3), the Cp
improved from 0.89 to 1.463, and Cpk was upgraded from 0.73 to
1.33. The standard deviation for the SCPI optimization stage was
reduced from 326.60 to 142.39. In the MCPI optimization stage, Cp
and Cpk were enhanced to 1.485 and 1.38, respectively. The sample
mean of the MCPI optimization is closer to the nominal value
(5850 mil3). In the ‘‘control’’ phase of DMAIC, the x  R control charts
should be regularly updated for long-term monitoring of the solder
paste volume following the control limits indicated in Fig. 10.
4. Conclusions
SMT has become the dominant process used in the electronics
industry. Poor SPP performance can cause significant productivity
and quality losses. A large variation in the solder paste volume
from the nominal value and significant amount of printing defects
have the potential to produce soldering failures that can signifi-
cantly increase manufacturing costs to correct the defects. This
is particularly evident in the fine-pitch printing process. To
continuously improve the fine-pitch SPP capability, the DMAIC
framework is followed. First the instrumental accuracy was
confirmed through a Gage R&R study. An L18 (21  37) Taguchi
OA was employed to collect structured process data. In the
‘‘improve’’ phase of DMAIC, Taguchi-based methodologies are
proposed under the considerations of SCPI and MCPI properties.
The optimization results show that the fine-pitch SPP is adequate
with a Cp above 1.46 and a Cpk above 1.33 when using these two
proposed methodologies. As a result, the optimization methodolo-
gies developed in this study are useful for improving both the SCPI
and MCPI of fine-pitch SPP with minimal defects. Nevertheless, the
optimization performance derived from the Taguchi fuzzy-based
model is superior to that of the SCPI. We also found that the
geometric design of the stencil is important. It is important to adjust
the aperture size and thickness of the stencil so that the process
mean approaches the nominal value. In addition, in the ‘‘control’’
phase of DMAIC, the x  R control charts can be regularly updated to
perform long-term monitoring of solder paste volume for contin-
uous improvement of the DMAIC cycle.
Acknowledgments
The author would like to thank the subject company for
providing related support and the National Science Council of
the Republic of China, Taiwan for supporting this research under
Contract no. NSC 97-2221-E-366-007.
References
[1] Itoh M. General information on solder paste—technical report. Tokyo: KOKI
Company Limited; 2005.
817
[2] Shina SG. Six sigma for electronics design and manufacturing. New York:
McGraw-Hill; 2002.
[3] Montgomery DC, Keats JB, Perry LA, Thompson JR, Messina WS. Using
statistically designed experiments for process development and improve-
ment: an application in electronics manufacturing. Robotics and Computer
Integrated Manufacturing 2000;16:55–63.
[4] He D, Ekere NN, Salam B, Rajkumar D, Jackson G. Monte Carlo study of solder
paste microstructure and ultra-fine-pitch stencil printing. Journal of Materi-
als Science 2003;14:501–6.
[5] Kennedy J. A study of solder paste printing requirements for CSP technology.
Soldering and Surface Mount Technology 2000;12:13–8.
[6] Tsai T-N, Yang T. A neuro-computing approach to the thermal profile control
of the second-side reflow process in surface mount assembly. Journal of
Manufacturing Technology Management 2005;16(3):343–59.
[7] Liukkonen M, Hiltunen T, Havia E, Leinonen H, Hiltunen Y. Modeling of
soldering quality by using artificial neural networks. IEEE Transactions on
Electronics Packaging Manufacturing 2009;32(2):89–96.
[8] Bao X, Lee N-C, Raj RB, Rangan KP, Maria A. Engineering solder paste
performance through controlled stress rheology analysis. Soldering and
Surface Mount Technology 1997;10:26–35.
[9] Owczarek JA, Howland FL. A study of the off-contact screen printing
process—Part I: model of the printing process and some results derived from
experiment. IEEE Transactions on Components, Hybrids, and Manufacturing
Technology 1990;13(2):358–67.
[10] Pan J, Tonkay GL, Storer RH, Sallade RM, Leandri DJ. Critical variables of solder
paste stencil printing for Micro-BGA and fine-pitch QFP. IEEE Transactions on
Electronics Packaging and Manufacturing 2004;27:125–32.
[11] Whitmore M, Mackay C, Hobby A. Plastic stencils for bottom-side chip attach.
Electronic Packaging and Production 1997;37:68–72.
[12] Mannan SH, Ekere NN, Ismail I, Lo EK. Squeegee deformation study in the
stencil printing of solder pastes. IEEE Transactions on Components, Hybrids,
and Manufacturing Technology 1994;17(3):470–5.
[13] Al-Refaie A. Optimizing SMT performance using comparisons of efficiency
between different systems technique in DEA. IEEE Transactions on Electro-
nics Packaging Manufacturing 2009;32(4):256–64.
[14] Zhang F, Luk T. A data mining algorithm for monitoring PCB assembly quality.
IEEE Transactions on Electronics Packaging Manufacturing 2007;30(4):299–305.
[15] Zadeh LA. Fuzzy sets. Information and Control 1965;8:338–53.
[16] Ross PJ. Taguchi techniques for quality engineering. New York: McGraw-Hill;
1996.
[17] Hedayat AS, Sloane NJA, Stufken J. Orthogonal arrays: theory and applica-
tions. New York: Springer-Verlag; 1999.
[18] Benardos PG, Mosialos S, Vosniakos G-C. Prediction of workpiece elastic
deflections under cutting forces in turning. Robotics and Computer-Inte-
grated Manufacturing 2006;22:505–14.
[19] Gaitonde VN, Karnik SR, Achyutha BT, Siddeswarappa B. Methodology of
Taguchi optimization for multi-objective drilling problem to minimize burr
size. International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology
2007;34:1–8.
[20] Phadke MS. Quality engineering using robust design. AT&T Bell Labs; 1989.
[21] Taguchi G. System of experiment design. New York: Unipub/Kraus Interna-
tional; 1987.
[22] Tzeng Y-F, Chen FC. Multi-objective optimization of high-speed electrical
discharge machining process using a Taguchi fuzzy-based approach. Materi-
als and Design 2007;28:1159–68.
[23] Chen KS, Wu CH, Chen SC. Criteria of determining the P/T upper limits of
GR&R in MSA. Quality and Quantity 2008;42:23–33.
[24] Rout BK, Mittal RK. Screening of factors influencing the performance of
manipulator using combined array design of experiment approach. Robotics
and Computer-Integrated Manufacturing 2009;25:651–66.
[25] Saaty TL. Fundamentals of decision making and priority theory with the
analytic hierarchy process. Pittsburgh: RWS Publications; 2000.
[26] Saaty TL. The analytic hierarchy process: planning, priority setting and
resource allocation. NY: McGraw-Hill; 1980.
[27] Sipahi S, Timor M. The analytic hierarchy process and analytic network process:
an overview of applications. Management Decision 2010;48(5):775–808.
[28] De Feo JA, Barnard W. JURAN institute’s six sigma breakthrough and
beyond—quality performance breakthrough methods. New York: Tata
McGraw-Hill Publishing Company Limited; 2005.
[29] Pedrycz W. Why triangular membership functions? Fuzzy Sets and Systems
1994;64:21–30.
[30] Zimmermann H-J. Fuzzy set theory and its applications. Massachusetts:
Kluwer; 1996.
[31] Lathrop RR. Solder paste print qualification using laser triangulation. IEEE
Transactions on Electronics Packaging and Manufacturing 1997;20:174–82.